The thread is now open again, please keep what was said above in mind.
The XM-1 is also 9.3, not 10.7… You aren’t fighting tanks like the T-90A or MBT-2000 or Leopard 2A4M/PLs, which are pretty common in the M1.
Well, having watched your recent gameplay, I’m sure watching you try to argue how strong the M1 is in a 1v1 is going to be entertaining for how long it’ll take you to spade it.
Well good thing the armor analysis isn’t! Funny how the M774 will hit a T-series track from the top at an angle, gets redirected and surprise surprise, can’t pen the side of the tank! Guess what round DOESN’T do that? M833. Even 3BM4, the Russian 8.7 APFSDS, goes right through the track, both at the same angle that eats M774 and even across the track, just fine and has worse stats than the M774…
But you are fighting T-72A, T-72B, etc. and for M735 they’re just as hard to penetrate as T-90A is for M774.
Tracks and wheel sprockets will occasionally bounce rounds, doesn’t matter if it’s M774 or not. In most cases M774 and other darts will easily go through the entire track and penetrate the tank, like in this example.
That dart is more than fine, you’re just trying to portray it as some unusable garbage.
The XM-1 is also 9.3, not 10.7… You aren’t fighting tanks like the T-90A or MBT-2000 or Leopard 2A4M/PLs, which are pretty common in the M1.
And? It’s the same weakspots you need to aim for essentially and you’re once again talking about uptiers where tanks will naturally be harder to kill.
Well, having watched your recent gameplay, I’m sure watching you try to argue how strong the M1 is in a 1v1 is going to be entertaining for how long it’ll take you to spade it.
I’ve got no idea where you’re going with this. I’ve been spading the XM803 recently and I’m getting about a module or near a module per battle. I would imagine it has taken you even longer than it will take me given you’ve averaged 0.6 kills per battle in it, whereas I’m averaging 2 kills per battle in it right now.
Well good thing the armor analysis isn’t! Funny how the M774 will hit a T-series track from the top at an angle, gets redirected and surprise surprise, can’t pen the side of the tank! Guess what round DOESN’T do that? M833. Even 3BM4, the Russian 8.7 APFSDS, goes right through the track, both at the same angle that eats M774 and even across the track, just fine and has worse stats than the M774…
Absolutely untrue, every shell can and does get gaijin’d. Stop pretending as if only M774 suffers from this because it simply is not true.
I’m pretty sure 3BM-4 in itself is also pathetically weak compared to M774 (it’s like ~280’ish mm of penetration versus like ~370mm or so), so, if we were to take his words at face value, this is how it’d look:
Weaker shell (3BM-4) > stronger shell (M774)
Weaker shell (M774) < stronger shell (M833)
Which makes zero sense, because as you have already stated, it happens to every APFSDS in the game and there isn’t any reason why 3BM-4 would perform better than M774 in such scenarios, I’ve had DM53 get gaijin’d like that, and surely DM53 isn’t weaker than 3BM-4 by any means (XD).
Yup, hell I had a barrel take zero damage last night from about 15m away firing straight down his barrel with APFSDS and nothing happened at all. You couldn’t even see anything other than the void of his barrel through the gunner sight and it just vanished into thin air.
Every shell is subject to the absolute power of )))))))))))))))))))
Except it isn’t the same. There’s a huge difference in both ERA and composite armor between the two battle ratings. At least the XM-1 is competitive at the BR as the APFSDS was designed with what it fights in mind.
A module/module per battle doesn’t mean anything, I’m talking about how you use it. You’re going to get absolutely slaughtered in the M1 with the way you play it. The M1 cannot slug it out at all at its BR.
M774 v 3BM3 Funny because explain that then? I just realized I named it 3BM3 instead of 3BM4, but still, I used the literal first APFSDS Russia gets v the M774 and do explain how that works.
Well according to Gaijin, it can be even though the ricochet angles are about the same between the two. M774 v 3BM3
M774 v 3BM3 Hmmm, don’t feel like other rounds get this. Now imagine how often this occurs on angled armor because it’s the same mechanic at work EVEN THOUGH it should be within the shells capability.
A module/module per battle doesn’t mean anything, I’m talking about how you use it. You’re going to get absolutely slaughtered in the M1 with the way you play it. The M1 cannot slug it out at all at its BR.
This reads like pure copium. My performance is above yours in general around that BR with US vehicles. I get more kills per battle and I get more kills per death than you do. Don’t project your own problems onto others. This all just reads like you beginning to panic because you know that I’ll have the vehicle shortly and your favourite excuse of “You don’t even have the vehicle!” will have to get swapped out with a new bad excuse.
I look forward to it.
This is interesting. You should bug report this.
Maybe datamine could reveal more about this.
Gaijin alway being fishy when it come to game code.
For example we found out long ago that Abrams and Challenger has 50% Detonation change (ammo) compare to others which has 15% . And Gaijin never mention a single things in patch note or dev blog.
Plenty of shells of different calibers will experience the same thing, with the likes of 105mm M774, M833, DM33 and 120mm DM23 being tested. But most importantly, your M833 also suffered from the same thing, so adding it wouldn’t solve anything in this regard.
If you believe this is a bug you can submit a bug report.
EDIT: I’ve also found that ERA plates on the side of the tank help with this issue, round will still bounce from the track but will actually penetrate the tank. This is weird behavior.
EDIT2: I’ve also found out that even M1’s track and armor is capable of bouncing and eating some rounds from certain angles that are stronger than M774.
2A4’s tracks will behave in the same way from certain angles as well when shot with 105mm DM33.
So no, this is not an M774-only issue nor will this be resolved by adding M833 to M1.
I tested the vehicles with low “detonationProb”, it refers to the probability of the tank experiencing a catastrophic detonation that deletes the hull and leaves a crater. It does not refer to ammo rack health.
Thx you for clarify. As i didn’t see anyone explain this before.
Even though it won’t impact gameplay. It still kind of weird that T-72s,T-80s,T-64s didn’t have higher change of catastrophic detonation % (given as we know irl no blow out penel tend to do that when catastrophic detonation happen)
Honestly, not even sure what causes it to happen unless it’s to due to the calculation between short rod and long rod APFSDS. I feel like it’d be a very broad bug report that would get dropped as the cause isn’t stated because I agree, it’s funky.
Yeah, I’ve been saying it should go in BR for years now.
No, if you want a Obj. 292 equivalent, ask for the M1 Thumper, an M1 with a 140mm gun.
I think the Thumper prototype had a few additional advantages over the standard M1 abrams, including reinforced armor and a fast autoloader.
I do know Germany apparently messed around with a 140mm gun on a Leopard 2, a fairly basic looking one from the ~2 images of it online. That might be closer to Obj 292; as it is a T-80B with bigger gun.